IDA & IBRD total vs Viet Nam: CPIA structural policies cluster average
CPIA structural policies cluster average over time
- IDA & IBRD total
- Viet Nam
How they compare
Viet Nam currently reports 3.5 1=low to 6=high against 3.15 1=low to 6=high in IDA & IBRD total, a difference of 0.35 1=low to 6=high.
That makes Viet Nam's figure about 1.1 times IDA & IBRD total's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 11 shared years of data; in 2005 it was IDA & IBRD total ahead.
IDA & IBRD total ranks 25th and Viet Nam ranks 22nd of 42 groups.
Across the 2 decades both report, IDA & IBRD total averaged higher in 1 and Viet Nam in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | IDA & IBRD total | Viet Nam | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.4 1=low to 6=high | 3.33 1=low to 6=high | 0.0717 1=low to 6=high | IDA & IBRD total |
| 2010s | 3.33 1=low to 6=high | 3.42 1=low to 6=high | 0.0908 1=low to 6=high | Viet Nam |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia structural policies cluster average, IDA & IBRD total or Viet Nam?
- Viet Nam, at 3.5 1=low to 6=high against 3.15 1=low to 6=high in IDA & IBRD total as of 2015.
- What is the difference in cpia structural policies cluster average between IDA & IBRD total and Viet Nam?
- 0.35 1=low to 6=high, with Viet Nam ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for IDA & IBRD total and Viet Nam?
- 11 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2015.
- How do IDA & IBRD total and Viet Nam rank globally for cpia structural policies cluster average?
- IDA & IBRD total ranks 25th and Viet Nam ranks 22nd of 42 groups.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA structural policies cluster average (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA) measures the extent to which a country’s policy and institutional framework supports sustainable growth and poverty reduction, and consequently the effective use of development assistance. The outcome of the exercise yields both an overall score and scores for sixteen criteria that compose the CPIA. These criteria include: A. Economic Management (1. Monetary and Exchange Rate Policies; 2. Fiscal Policy; 3. Debt Policy and Management), B. Structural Policies (4. Trade; 5. Financial Sector; 6. Business Regulatory Environment), C. Policies for Social Inclusion/Equity (7. Gender equality; 8. Equity of public resource use; 9. Building human resources; 10. Social protection and labor; 11. Policies and institutions for environmental sustainability), D. Public Sector Management and Institutions (12. Property rights and rule-based governance; 13. Quality of budgetary and financial management; 14. Efficiency of revenue mobilization; 15. Quality of public administration; 16. Transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector). The Structural Policies cluster includes trade, financial sector, and business regulatory environment.